By -Hammer- (registered) | Posted December 21, 2011 at 04:22:58
in reply to Comment 72397
I found the taxation analogy to be apt in this case. What's accomplished by mandatory voting is first of greater legitimacy for the government. That the government is being chosen by ALL the people, not just the politically motivated individuals.
It also forces candidates to engage the citizenry as a whole and not unfairly focus on certain special interests in society who are more likely to vote (such as the elderly who historically vote in much higher numbers).
It also encourages blank balloting far more, and to protest and show dissatisfaction with the entire selection of candidates or the electoral system as a whole.
Also, consider larger campaigns designed to attract voters into the political process become less important as a result of compulsory voting, because everyone has to vote. This somewhat reduces the role of money in politics and increases the value of actual substance amongst candidates.
It also serves as a guilt free method of taxation. A small fine on an individual who doesn't have the will to get to a polling station and cast a ballot and has ample recourse in this day and age to vote early on multiple dates is something I can get behind.
Besides, Jury Duty is also a civic duty with harsh penalties and is far more inconvenient and painstaking then voting ever could be.
Comment edited by -Hammer- on 2011-12-21 04:24:46
Still waiting for the Randle Reef mess to get cleaned up, but hopefully not much longer!
Raise The Hammer | Website © 2004, 2009 | Article © by the author | Contact Us